Before you can join the Laurens County Republican Party in South Carolina and get on the primary ballot, they ask that you pledge that you’ve never ever had pre-marital sex — and that you will never ever look at porn again.
The LCGOP unanimously adopted a resolution that would ask all candidates who want to get on the primary ballot to sign a pledge with 28 principles, because the party “does not want to associate with candidates who do not act and speak in a manner that is consistent with the SC Republican Party Platform.”
You must favor, and live up to, abstinence before marriage.
You must be faithful to your spouse. Your spouse cannot be a person of the same gender, and you are not allowed to favor any government action that would allow for civil unions of people of the same sex.You cannot now, from the moment you sign this pledge, look at pornography.
It is unclear how they will precisely determine this (or regulate it), but an unidentified potential candidate for office in Laurens County told the Chronicle that candidates will be interviewed by a three-person subcommittee, who will then recommend to the full executive committee whether to allow the candidate on the ballot…
Chairman Bobby Smith clarified in a statement Monday that “due to various legal issues” the LCGOP cannot require that the candidates sign the pledge if they meet all of the other qualifications for a run. But, he said, the committee “reserves the right to vet its candidates and will encourage all candidates to uphold the principles of the party’s platform as well as petition candidates to sign a pledge to do so. However, no candidate will be denied access to the Republican Party primary ballot for refusing to sign the pledge.”
Sooner or later they’ll issue armbands.
boring.
I don’t care.
If people want to join a family values organization let them.
If the poster wants to join a group that’s into group sex with whatever, do it, and mind your own business.
Hey Mac:
I gotta say, I’ve heard now the woman (Fluke) is saying the contraceptives are for medical reasons including ovarian cysts, dysmenorrhea, etc. I would like to see her documentation that the meds have been refused for treating those conditions. It’s standard treatment for many conditions and I’m willing to bet Bobbo’s immortal soul that she can’t show a major health insurance company that refuses to cover them. And I know I’ve prescribed them at (at least) two Catholic hospitals.
As for covering gender reassignment? I think you could make a better case for that being actual health care than for birth control coverage…
Animby–THE POINT AT ISSUE is proposed regulation to make prescribing contraceptives NOT PART of a standard insurance policy. If you want the pill, regardless of purpose, you have to get it specifically covered.
Thats because all too many, like Alfie responding exactly off point, can’t think past contraception = sex = immoral = lets outlaw it as much as we can.
Your rationality opposing this Republican Taliban intrusion into private affairs is all why your CONSERVATIVE values are to be respected why your Republican support is to be recognized and corrected.
More than just words.
Somehow people are offended that Rush called a woman who wanted the government to pay for her to have sex a prostitute. Then they are offended that he said a woman who spends a $1000 a year on birth control is a slut.
Do you know how much “the pill” costs?
I don’t.
But I do know that she never asked the government to pay for her contraception.
Ed Schultz and Bill Maher call women sluts and more all the time. Bill Maher just contributed $1000,000 dollars to the Obama SuperPAC. Somehow his comments are getting less attention than the joke made by a Santorum contributor that people used to use aspirin for birth control, which the media didn’t even understand as a joke.
Those women were sluts/whores/radio personalities stirring the pot for their own points of view. One line maybe two. Neither one the head of a political party spending hours/days on the legitimate health concerns of a private American.
Big difference unless you have shit for brains.
Bill Maher is a….. comedian.
Rush is a…… conservative talk show mouth piece.
Oh, and the Sanatorium backer Friess is a investment manager, not an entertainer, so the comment about asprin was sexist. Hence the MSM running with the ball as you pointed out.
I wonder what percentage of Republicans are celibate before marriage?
I’ll guess that the number is very very low.
Who doesn’t like being sexually taunted by a guy busted on a sex holiday with a jug of illegal erection pills?
Only 35% of males are physically attractive to females and only 20% of males are psychologically attractive to females.
It’s just that the 100% of males that “speak” the loudest for the “morality wing” of the Republican party fall in the 0% bracket of both does the Republican party get a bad rep.
The “union” wing of the Democrat party is equally in the 0% bracket and equally as flat headed as their religious beliefs but they don’t get to speak for their party in such matters.
Republicans shouldn’t let ugly flat headed males who are unattractive to females both physically and in the mind speak at the podium.
But they do.
And so an unelectable numb nuts like Santorum who has the amazing political position of being both against abortion and contraception actually has some traction.
Except dipshits never win presidential elections.
But Republicans think it is okay for ugly and harebrained loser males to speak for their party about morality (meanwhile they’re molesting kids in the Penn State showers).
It’s fucking pathetic. But that’s Tea Party for you.
>Only 35% of males are physically attractive to females and only 20% of males are psychologically attractive to females.
So why tax the people who are not having sex to give to the people who are having sex. Shouldn’t it be the other way around?
Because people who don’t care what other people do with their spare time, or even as a fulltime dedication, don’t want unwanted babies produced like cavities in teeth.
Just a little prevention: you only have to brush the teeth you want to keep.
Silly Hooman.
My point is that these “lecturers” on “family values” and “sex” are
1) Imagining their lack of options as “faithfulness”. That’s denial-ville.
2) People with no sex-life or a lack of options shouldn’t be lecturing the rest of us when it is really the person with the problem is themselves.
Bible thumpers don’t really get the idea that in a good healthy relationship, faithfulness is normal.
So really what is going on is a lot of miserable people trying to justify why they are happy.
Well .. if you need to do that, go see a shrink.
Other than Nixon, what Republican presidents ever qualified?
Why do Republicans hate sex?
It’s moot.
If you become a Republican, you will hate sex, too. We hold these truths to be self-evident.